Orbit Post Sitemap
🤣 8.17 Altcoins Top Movers Information Gap | This ranking is becoming increasingly abstract. As of the afternoon of August 17, the top five gainers on OKX have already locked in a batch of small-cap coins priced at $20 to 30 million. 🔥 CHIP +17.38%, 🚀 NES +14.84%, 👴 SNT +11.47%, ⚡ CORE +9.63%, 💀 XCH +7.76%. Even more interesting is their market capitalization. CHIP is about $64 million, NES $32.8 million, SNT $25.8 million, CORE $26.8 million, XCH $26.5 million. Except for CHIP, the other four are basically in the $20–30 million range. This market cap zone has become the area where Top Movers are most prone to exaggerated volatility at present. (OKX) 🔥 CHIP | Among this batch, the chip I agree with the most continues to grow +17% today, and it has remained strong for several consecutive days. Currently, CHIP is priced at about $0.032, with a 24-hour trading volume of $65.65 million and a circulating market value of about $64.04 million. 🤣 Here we go again. The daily trading volume has already exceeded the total circulating market capitalization. Moreover, compared to the previous day, trading volume increased by more than 104%, with prices rising about 45% cumulatively over the past seven days. This means CHIP has clearly entered a phase of high turnover. (No new stories beneath the foundation.
NVIDIA's play, frankly, is like you personally drew the blueprint for a skyscraper but suddenly downgraded the load-bearing wall ratings by three levels before the ribbon-cutting. From 250 billion to 120 billion — this cut in the guarantee amount is even more decisive than a construction crew rushing to unload materials. This is not credit tightening; it's clearly the chief structural engineer marking red flags on the blueprint: load test data failed, the tower crane need not operate at full capacity as originally planned.
But you have to see what their other hand is doing — holding $21 billion worth of SpaceX stock. This is like having an old property on the architecture firm's books that doesn't generate cash flow but represents a pass to the old world. Equity is a long-term possession commitment; credit is short-term trust on credit. NVIDIA's move is not about "controlling risk"; it's the structural engineer leaving an emergency escape route for themselves: withdrawing funding support from cloud infrastructure while betting chips on the steel, rockets, and Starlink framework.
You ask if computing power demand can turn into lasting revenue? Let me tell you a basic fact every architect knows: no matter how beautiful a commercial complex is, if the restroom drainage pipes are designed wrong, the floor will have to be torn up within six months of opening. NVIDIA's current "demand lock-in" is leveraging capital to pry open customer commitments — this is like welding the drainage pipes onto the load-bearing beams, saving engineering costs short-term but requiring the entire floor to be demolished for future repairs.
The most dangerous is the ghost of "circular financing." When a chip maker's revenue increasingly depends on guaranteeing loans for customers, the building's foundation is no longer concrete but debt derivatives. Hollow bricks are buried inside the load-bearing walls, coated with good paint on the outside, invisible to anyone. Tesla did this back in the day, and some crypto projects have done the same — the glass curtain walls on the ruins always shine especially bright.
So don't ask if computing power can be turned into dividends. First ask: when the north wind blows, is this building's damper made of steel core, or just numbers in an accounting book? #nvidiaaicapitalchainAs crypto assets increasingly approach real-world payments and mainstream finance, is a wallet merely an asset tool, or must it also bear greater responsibility for risk identification?
On one hand, some regions in the U.S. continue to tighten regulation on crypto ATMs, requiring the industry to strengthen anti-fraud and consumer protection measures; on the other hand, on-chain network security incidents, scam projects, and malicious authorizations keep occurring. Meanwhile, traditional financial institutions are advancing tokenization, stablecoin settlements, and more convenient crypto deposit and withdrawal channels.
Looking at these clues together means the entry points to Web3 are expanding, but users' cost of judgment has not decreased accordingly. Assets can flow faster, applications can be accessed more easily, and funds can enter the chain through more channels; yet if a wrong-chain transfer occurs, or funds are sent to a contract address, or users encounter high-risk addresses or phishing pages, they may still bear the full consequences.
Early wallet product logic was simple: generate mnemonic phrases, display balances, complete signatures. Security mainly relied on users safeguarding private keys themselves, verifying addresses, and understanding every transaction. Exchange custody lowered the operational threshold but required users to accept the trade-off between asset control and platform risk.
Today's competition is no longer just "non-custodial or custodial." The real question is: can non-custodial wallets help users identify risks earlier without taking over their assets? Can multi-chain wallets reduce the complexity of network switching, asset recognition, and cross-chain operations? Can AI truly explain transactions instead of just adding a chat entry on the homepage? S&P 500 Earnings Surge 31%, So Why Is Wall Street Quietly Tightening Price Targets?
The Q2 earnings reports for U.S. stocks delivered an explosive performance.
The S&P 500 index constituents saw overall earnings jump 31% year-over-year, overwhelmingly beating the market's previously conservative expectations. Major investment banks have accordingly raised their full-year earnings guidance. On the trading floor, the VIX volatility index has remained low for a long time, retail investors and hedge funds are aggressively buying call options, and greed is almost written on every trader's face.
But the extremely strange thing is that Wall Street's major sell-side banks are surprisingly restrained in their year-end target price forecasts for the S&P 500, only projecting less than a 2% increase from current prices.
Profits are booming, expectations are being raised, so why are the Wall Street heavyweights managing massive funds acting so cautious at these high levels?
The answer lies in the delicate balance between valuation and expectations.
A 31% profit growth rate is indeed impressive, but with the S&P 500's forward P/E ratio already hanging high in the historical top range of 21 to 22 times, the current stock price has largely priced in the earnings beats expected over the next one to two years.
From the institutions' micro-level calculations, among the two engines driving the market, the fuel tank for valuation expansion is basically empty. In the broader environment where long-term U.S. Treasury yields remain relatively high, capital cannot indefinitely assign higher valuation multiples to tech-heavy stocks.
This means that every step the index takes upward from here must rely entirely on real net profit growth to pull it along.
A more critical hidden risk lies in the extreme divergence of profit distribution.
Over the past year or so, the vast majority of profit growth has been carried by a very small number of AI computing power and heavyweight tech giants, while the profit improvements of more than 490 companies in traditional industries have been quite moderate. If the productivity dividends brought by AI do not quickly spread to broader sectors such as traditional industry, finance, consumer, and healthcare, the capital expenditure spree of a few giants alone cannot support the entire market reaching higher levels.
If the index truly wants to launch an assault toward higher targets in the future, the market needs more than just a few giants beating expectations by a few hundred million dollars again. It needs to see a successful interest rate cut cycle, a soft landing in labor costs, and comprehensive AI application blooming across traditional real economy sectors.
In the current U.S. stock allocation, rather than blindly chasing hardware hot stocks whose valuations are already stretched at historical highs, it is better to adopt a more balanced barbell strategy: allocate to broad-based indices as a stable core position, while seeking valuation troughs among high-quality non-tech leaders with ample free cash flow benefiting from interest rate cut expectations.
Facing the U.S. stock earnings boom and Wall Street's cautious targets, do you think the S&P 500 can continue to break records wildly? Is your current capital focus more on U.S. tech giants, or are you looking for more cost-effective defensive assets?
---
The above content represents personal views only and does not constitute any investment advice. DYOR, NFA.
#标普盈利超预期，华尔街为何仍谨慎？ 以太坊这单，终于让账户缓过来一口气。入场价1882.2，百倍杠杆，现价1903，浮动盈利104U。上周在垃圾币的泥潭里滚了太久，这单算是把我从泥里拽了出来。但说实话，现在还不到能松口气的时候。止损卡在1833，离现价只有70美元的距离。市场太薄了，一个假摔就能把这点利润全部吞回去。所以我立马把止盈线推到1890到1895一带。一旦回踩，最多也就损失四五十美元，这单至少不会亏。接着价格继续走到1915，止损也跟着上移到1905，剩下的就交给市场自己跑。这单的使命不是翻本，而是站稳。能在这周拿回100U，已经是能期待的最好开局了。 说实话，这种操作讲究的是纪律。明明带着杠杆，却像走钢丝一样步步为营。止损、止盈、移动止损，每一个动作都在对抗人性的贪婪和恐惧。过去一周在那些没有流动性的小币里吃够了亏，深刻体会到一件事：在没有深度的市场里，所谓的技术支撑不过是纸糊的墙。这单之所以能拿住，不是因为我多自信，而是因为我把每一个可能的方向都提前想好了。价格往上，有移动止损保护利润；价格往下，初始止损限制亏损。剩下的事情，情绪参与得越少，结果往往越干净。 再看$BEAT，今天还在阴跌，15分钟线又一次往Everyone is asking who AI will disrupt
Recently, I've been thinking about a question: Who is the one AI just can't kill?
The answer is a type of company called HALO
Heavy Assets, Low Obsolescence
Mining, power generation equipment, submarine engineering fleets, power grids, heavy machinery, logistics fleets, outdoor billboards
Barriers are not codes and patents, but steel, land, ships, and factories
You can't mine with large models, nor can you lay underwater cables with GPT.
And these companies are even taking AI's money instead
A data center needs to be built, right? You need to buy backup power generation equipment, cooling systems, and upgrade the power grid
Mining infrastructure needs to expand, right? We have to buy heavy machinery
They are not enemies of AI, but suppliers of AI infrastructure.
————
Two names I find interesting but not very mainstream:
Finning International（FTT）
As one of the world's largest Caterpillar distributors, its data center primary and backup power needs have directly turned into its orders, with a power business backlog approaching CAD 1.2 billion, while securing a cycle of copper mining and oil and gas expansion.
Subsea 7（SUBC）
Submarine engineering contractors have scarce cable-laying fleets in hand, with a backlog of $13.6 billion. If underwater data centers really are deployed,
Seawater cooling, submarine power, and optical cable installation
It's all about its life.
Another frequently included in this frame is: CumminsThe 23-hour trading system of the US stock market and its 3 core impacts on the crypto market
First, the price distortion of tokens mapped to US stocks has significantly decreased. Previously, after the US stock market closed, the mapped underlying assets lacked real-time price anchoring from the actual stocks, causing crypto speculators to often drive independent price movements detached from fundamentals. For example, $SNDK frequently experienced independent rallies during US stock market off-hours. With the extended trading hours of US stocks, the underlying stocks can be traded normally during most of the workday, allowing market makers to hedge in real time, which significantly narrows the price gap and slippage between tokens and their underlying stocks.
Second, the capital diversion effect becomes apparent, as traditional speculative funds now have an around-the-clock trading option. In the past, during US stock market closures, many US stock traders would flock to the crypto market seeking trading opportunities. With nearly uninterrupted trading during US stock market workdays, a large amount of short-term capital remains in the US stock market, diverting existing speculative funds away from the crypto sector.
Third, the price feedback to macro news becomes more continuous, changing the intraday volatility rhythm of BTC and ETH. Previously, sudden geopolitical events or Federal Reserve speeches at night could not be immediately priced by the US stock market, so volatility was first released in the crypto market. After the US stock market started long trading hours, major news is reflected first on the US stock market, and risk sentiment is simultaneously transmitted to the crypto market. Crypto is no longer the sole leading sentiment market at night, and the frequency of short-term sudden spikes will change. However, since only the crypto market trades around the clock on weekends, crypto’s price discovery role during weekends remains unchanged.
This article is only a market review and does not constitute any investment advice#BTC成交萎缩，ETF买盘能否回暖 🚀 $OKB Market Update & Short Prediction 📈
Current Price: $OKB 103.49 (-0.56%)
24h High: $OKB 105.95 | 24h Low: $102.35
📊 Analysis
Trend: Minor pullback/consolidation after hitting a local peak of $109.85! ⚖️
Moving Averages: Holding above MA10 ($100.03) and MA20 ($93.31), with MA5 near $104.84.
Structure: High higher-low structure remains intact on the daily chart.
🎯 Short Prediction & Targets
Bullish Target 1: $106.50 🎯
Bullish Target 2: $110.00 🚀
Key Support Level: $100.00 🛡️The sharp downtrend of SNDK has not yet met the invalidation conditions. How should we interpret the gap between the superficial rebound attempts and the actual position structure? SNDK has been continuously blocked from rebounding after falling more than 99% from its peak. The core reasons can be summarized into three points. First, the continuous unlocking volume acts as selling pressure. Second, the liquidation waves erase leveraged long positions with each rebound attempt, weakening the upward momentum. Third, in this environment, there is still no evidence of spot accumulation. During the same period, sector stocks like BICO, BEAT, ALLO, KAITO, and APR showed relatively clean recovery patterns based on basis normalization and funding rate stabilization during the liquidity return phase. These stocks experienced base compression during the decline, followed by spot demand inflows that opened a short squeeze path. In contrast, SNDK has only been consolidating without base compression, making it unclear whether the current price level is support or simply a neutral zone during the decline This is not an ordinary position chart.
This is a "short coalition battle deployment map."
On the morning of August 17, two addresses, only 3 seconds apart, added positions simultaneously—one person pressed the button, the other followed.
This is not a coincidence; this is coordinated combat.
Three details, chilling upon closer thought.
First, the operation is highly synchronized.
The second-ranked short 0x8c96 added 450 BTC shorts this morning in the $62,858-$63,435 range, increasing holdings from 1,250 to 1,700 BTC. Another address 0x431f almost simultaneously added positions.
Both have the same leverage (22x) and nearly overlapping liquidation prices ($64,983 vs $65,103).
These are not two independent traders. This is a team.
Second, stop-loss orders are uniformly set at $63,971.
Covering 1,003.1 BTC, accounting for 37.5% of the total two positions, corresponding to about $64.17 million.
The $63,971 level is a "false support trap."
When the price falls to this level, you think it will hold? No, their stop-loss orders are hanging here—if the price rebounds to this level, shorts will actively close positions, turning into buy orders, giving you the illusion that it "held." When you chase in, they have already reopened shorts at a lower level.
Third, the target is directly aimed at the $58,000 range.
Take-profit trigger prices are set near $58,123 and $58,423.
From $63,000 down to $58,000—a $5,000 drop range.
Here comes the more exciting part.
Adding the top-ranked short 0xff84’s 2,000 BTC (~$127 million), Hyperliquid’s three major shorts hold about $234 million in total.
But the top short has a fatal weakness—he’s about to break.
Since opening the position on August 5, he has closed 1,490 BTC, 30 reductions all at a loss, realizing a total loss plus fees of about $9 million. Currently holding 2,000 BTC, cost $63,582, liquidation price $63,579.
Current price $63,200, only $379 away from his liquidation price.
A 3.3% rebound can take him out.
Here’s the question.
A short who has already lost $9 million is still holding on desperately. Two new shorts come in, adding positions synchronously, unified stop-loss, clear targets.
Tell me, is this confidence or desperation?
Save this chart.
Look back in a week—see if the shorts’ plan succeeded or if the bulls overturned the table.
The $63,971 stop-loss trap, the $58,000 target, a $294 million bet.
The stage is set. Let’s see who falls first.
$BTC $ETH Goldman Sachs is shifting its rate outlook, but $BTC hasn’t really reacted yet.
The message is simple: September rate hikes look increasingly unlikely. Weak retail data, softer employment and stubborn inflation are making the market’s hiking expectations look too aggressive. Goldman also sees expectations potentially moving further out, with earlier easing still on the table.
That sounds positive for risk assets.
But $BTC and $ETH still have a momentum problem.
Last week’s ETF flows were not strong enough to sustain buying pressure, and spot volume remains relatively quiet.
For $BTC, the 63,800–64,500 zone is still the key resistance area.
Until we see a genuine volume-backed breakout, macro headlines can provide a floor, but they probably aren’t enough to start a sustained rally.
I’m watching volume more than headlines here.
#BTCVolumeDriesUp #SPCXOwnershipRevealed #OKXOutcomeLeagueS2 $HYPE is repeatedly testing support near $59, with the price maintaining a fragile buying balance above the uptrend line.
On the chart, bulls continue to push prices higher driven by a deflationary expectation where transaction fees exceed 1 billion and 99% are used for buyback and burn. The upcoming AQAv2 upgrade next week, expected to bring an annualized $200 million buyback, further solidifies bullish consensus on the derivatives side.
However, spot liquidity shows a reverse flow, with a whale on-chain unstaking 20,000 tokens and directly transferring them to exchanges for deposit. The potential liquidation demand of large chips forms substantial resistance above the market.
If the deflationary expectation buying on the derivatives market cannot fully absorb the spot chips transferred on-chain, the current narrow-range consolidation will evolve into a liquidity consumption battle of chip turnover.
If buying holds above $59 against spot selling pressure and breaks out with volume, the deflationary expectation before AQAv2 launch will further attract trend funds to push the price higher.
Once a large on-chain sell-off concentrates and breaks below the current uptrend line, the bulls’ liquidity defense will fail, potentially triggering a cascade of stop losses from high-leverage long positions.
Going forward, focus on the actual consumption speed of spot deposit chips on the order book and the support performance of the uptrend line under volume surges.
#Tether首次完整审计：透明度成焦点 #BTC沉睡供应创新高，稀缺性再受关注 #OpenAI与Anthropic估值竞赛升温Recently, I have been managing a $BICO short position. This short position was gradually increased from a high level, and my homepage shows the real-time position status. The average opening price is about 0.038. There is already a considerable unrealized profit. My original idea was simple: as long as the trend continues, keep holding. But recently, the funding fee for BICO has been rising, so high that I had to recalculate the cost of holding the position, because when the funding fee reaches a certain level, it changes the trading outcome. The cumulative funding fee for BICO in the last 3 days has reached -4.019%. So, the next decision on whether to keep holding this short position depends on a simple question: how much more can it fall in the future, and can it cover the upcoming funding fees? Using the actual funding fee of the last 3 days as a reference: if BICO does not fall by 4% in the next 3 days, even if the direction is correct, continuing to hold this short position is meaningless. I also checked the BICO funding fees in different markets. At the time I checked the position, the short funding cost for BICO on OKX was relatively low among mainstream trading platforms. So, for me, switching platforms to continue holding does not solve the core problem. Ultimately, it comes down to whether this position is worth continuing to hold. Assuming the funding rate remains at the current high level, a rough estimate: holding for 3 more days, funding fee 4%, $BICO needs to fall at least 4%; holding for 7 more days, funding fee 9.33%, $BICO needs to fall at least 9.33% #AIInfraEarningsWatch AI infrastructure earnings remain powerful. Lumentum reported quarterly revenue of roughly $1.01 billion, up 109%, while Coherent grew 34% to $2.05 billion. Cisco’s quarterly revenue increased 18%, with full-year AI infrastructure orders reaching $9.3 billion. Applied Materials also delivered stronger revenue, earnings and forward guidance as semiconductor equipment demand remained elevated.
However, several of these stocks declined after reporting, showing that the market now expects more than headline growth. Investors are examining margins, capital expenditure, order visibility and the sustainability of AI spending. My view is that the infrastructure cycle remains healthy, but valuation has become the main risk. Companies with recurring orders, pricing power and disciplined financing should perform better than businesses relying heavily on optimistic projections. In this environment, future guidance and cash flow may matter more than a single quarterly earnings beat.Active Buy/Sell Radar
Active buying and selling have already diverged; next, we need to see if the price responds.
$XAU active buy accounts for 73.9%, net active 885,500, price synchronously up +0.07%, the buying side has already shown a positive response.
$APR net active direction is -161,700, buyers only account for 35.7%, price synchronously down -1.58%, the selling side has already caused displacement.
$BTC active transactions lean towards buying at 60.5%, price still at -0.05%, when volume continues to increase but price does not rise, watch out for weakening buying power. $BTC 63488, volume has come but it's not what you think!
I glanced this afternoon, BTC is a bit better than this morning, climbing from 62900 to 63488, up 0.8%, but don't rush to celebrate!
The trading volume has indeed increased, 24-hour volume reached 12.6 billion, a 45% surge compared to yesterday. The problem is—volume came out, but the price only moved a few hundred dollars.
What does this mean? Someone is selling, and someone is buying, but both sides are about equal in strength, pulling this way and that!
It looks more like a handover, not a breakout.
Also, the fear index dropped again, today at 31. Yesterday was 34, fluctuating between 27 and 34 for 8 consecutive days. Market sentiment hasn't collapsed, but why is no one optimistic? This state is very familiar to me—the sellers are tired, and buyers are probably still watching!
There's an on-chain data point I find interesting: the median realized price of $BTC is around 63000. This means a large amount of market chips cost around this level. Above that, short-term holders' cost is 68700—these people are all underwater. Below, 62650 is today's first defense line; if broken, it heads straight to 62000.
The White House is holding a meeting on Wednesday, with Trump, the CFTC chairman, SEC chairman, and a group of exchange CEOs sitting together. For this kind of meeting, a positive outcome is expected; if not, it's negative.
Kuzi's insight: the 63000-63500 range likely won't be broken this afternoon. Volume is increasing, but it's not directional volume, it's arguing volume. If it can't pass 63500 upwards and 62650 holds downwards, it will continue to grind. Whether it can break out depends on the market's ammunition!
To really see the direction, wait for Wednesday. After the meeting, funds will dare to pick a side!!
#BTC成交萎缩，ETF买盘能否回暖 How to allocate insurance stocks without pitfalls?
Here’s the conclusion directly:
Conservative: Ping An 6 + PICC 4
Balanced: Ping An 5 + PICC 2.5 + New China 2.5
Aggressive: New China 4 + Ping An 3.5 + PICC 2.5
Why this allocation?
Because these three companies are fundamentally different businesses.
PICC earns from operations
Ping An earns from customers
New China earns from the market
Valuation method explained once and for all:
Never look at PE for insurance; investment income volatility will seriously distort it.
Use four methods for cross-validation:
1. P/EV — currently Ping An 0.62, New China 0.57, both clearly undervalued
2. PB-ROE
3. Dividend yield back-calculation (3-5% forms a bond-like safety cushion)
4. SOTP segment valuation
PICC is the shield, Ping An is the base, New China is the spear.
There is no best, only what suits you~The situation in the Middle East's Horm $XAU Strait remains deadlocked, and geopolitical uncertainty has increased market risk premiums. The underlying support logic for these three asset classes is completely different and should not be simply treated as the same asset class. Crude oil is directly driven by supply logic. Expectations of blocked navigation channels have led funds to bet on contraction in crude oil supply, and geopolitical premiums have directly supported oil prices. If the conflict escalates, oil prices will be the first to surge; As the situation eases and premiums quickly fade, it is the most directly event-driven variety. Gold is traditionally a core safe-haven asset. Geopolitical turmoil combined with rising oil prices has brought potential inflation expectations, leading to capital inflows into gold to hedge risks. Central banks' continued gold purchases provide long-term bottom support, making it the most stable safe-haven asset during the escalating phase of geopolitical conflicts. Bitcoin cannot be directly equated with a safe-haven asset. When a short-term intense conflict erupts, it is often sold off as a risk asset; However, the current phase is a long-term diplomatic contest, with the market trading inflation rebound and uncertainty over US dollar credit. Coupled with long-term institutional ETF positioning and whales continuously locking up cold wallets, the market is indirectly driven upward by macro risk aversion. Looking at the crypto market internally, the recovery in overall market sentiment has also driven rotational speculation in thematic coins on the market. Pay special attention to the transmission chain: Oil prices continue to rise, inflation expectations rebound, which will change Fed policy expectations and ultimately suppress risk assets. Geopolitics are only short-term disturbances; the Fed's monetary policy is the core variable determining BTC's medium- to long-term trajectory. This article is only a market review and does not constitute any investment advice. #BTC成交萎缩, E🤣 Altcoins Top Movers Information Gap | 8.17 Today, OKX's gainers chart has changed again. CHIP +17.38% NES +14.84% SNT +11.47% CORE +9.63% XCH +7.76% PUMP +7.75% CSPR +7.74% RVN +7.43% BTC is still grinding around $63,000, while altcoins have started to play their own games. The most interesting thing on today's list isn't about "who rose 15%," but where yesterday's money went today. (OKX) 🔥 CHIP has dominated the chart for two consecutive days. When we recorded CHIP yesterday, it had already risen nearly 20%. Today, reopening OKX, CHIP still ranks first, with 24 hours up +17.38%. This sets it apart from regular Top Movers. Yesterday, BICO, ROBO, CARDS, all surged together, and today most have fallen out of the top row, while CHIP is still there. And there really is a logic behind CHIP that explains mid-term buying USD. AI has already repurchased about 3.71% of the total supply of CHIPS this year, with about 20% currently in circulation, and the remaining main tokens will only be gradually unlocked after April 2027. In other words, short-term new supply pressure is relatively limited📊 8.17 Mainstream Coin Information Gap | BTC Stands 🤣 🟠 Alone at 64K Again BTC | Some Money Has Returned, Price Hasn't Yet Broken Out BTC BTC is currently fluctuating around $63,300–$63,500, and today briefly retouched above $64,000, still down nearly 3% over the past 7 days. More importantly, leverage cooled simultaneously, with total BTC futures open interest at about $47.4 billion, down 3.35% over the week. On August 15, the perpetual funding rate was about +0.0085%, with long payments still present, and sentiment is far from extremely pessimistic. (CoinDesk) The pace of ETF funds is more interesting. In early August, the US spot BTC ETF saw continuous inflows, with a net inflow of about $626 million over the first three trading days. Funds then fluctuated, with a net outflow of about $61.16 million on August 12, another $131 million on August 13, and another $57.63 million on August 14. 📉 The most obvious problem with BTC these past few days is that ETF buying has not formed continuity, contract leverage is still shrinking, and above 64K, there is always a shortage of someone willing to keep taking in stocks. (CryptoTicker.io) So now I see BTC's short-term structure as weak and volatile. 64K–65K is the first resistance, while 62K–63K remains a battleground for bulls and bears. ThisLast week (August 10 to 14), Ethereum spot ETFs saw a total net outflow of $2.26 million.
On the surface, it looks like funds are exiting, but breaking it down reveals a completely different story.
BlackRock's ETHA led with a net outflow of $16.39 million, followed by Fidelity's FETH with a simultaneous outflow of $5.59 million.
During the same period, Grayscale Ethereum Mini Trust (ETH) bucked the trend with a net inflow of $15.06 million.
Top funds are in a tug of war. BlackRock and Fidelity are pulling out, while Grayscale is stepping in. Short-term institutional funds are taking profits, while another batch is entering at lower levels. ETHA has a historical cumulative net inflow of $11.63 billion, FETH $2.12 billion, and Grayscale $1.82 billion. The total historical cumulative net inflow across all categories is $11.45 billion, with a total net asset value of $10.52 billion.
Short-term redemptions do not equal a collapse of long-term confidence; some institutions are cashing out, while others are buying the dip. A $2.26 million outflow is negligible compared to the $10.52 billion total market size, but internal divisions are indeed growing. Data from DWF Labs shows that Ethereum ETFs have outperformed Bitcoin ETFs in inflows for two consecutive months—June saw ETH ETF net outflows at 4.65% of fund size, lower than BTC's 8.09%; July saw ETH net inflows at 3.19%, compared to BTC's 0.34%, with the former being 9.4 times the latter.
In May, institutions generally lacked interest in ETH. The trend has reversed in recent weeks. The flow of funds moving from BTC to ETH continues, albeit with short-term fluctuations.
$ETH The mainnet launch of the Glamsterdam upgrade has been postponed to Q4.
Originally scheduled for the end of August, it is now pushed to the end of the year.
This is the largest protocol overhaul for Ethereum since The Merge.
Two core proposals—ePBS (EIP-7732) and BALs (EIP-7928)—are included in this upgrade. ePBS integrates proposer-builder separation directly into the protocol, eliminating reliance on third-party relays. BALs introduce block-level access lists, allowing transactions to be processed in parallel instead of sequentially. In theory, this can significantly increase L1 throughput.
Glamsterdam Devnet 8 launched on August 11. The technical progress is ongoing, but market attention is completely elsewhere, focused on price and macro factors. Technical upgrades rarely drive price alone in a bear market, but they determine Ethereum's form years down the line.
Once market sentiment improves, Glamsterdam will become part of the ETH narrative. If the upgrade is successfully implemented, L1 scalability will see substantial improvement. $ETH 交易进行到第17天，账户余额只剩20u，距离1000u的目标依然遥远。这位挑战者的话语里，透露出一股难以掩饰的疲惫感。那种“我觉得自己快撑不住了”的状态，许多经历过连续亏损的人都不会陌生。这已不单纯是关于技术判断的游戏，更多的是一场心理与情绪的拉锯战。 从30u起步，到如今仅剩20u，意味着账户已经落入亏损区间。更令人忐忑的是，目前他手里仍持有$ETH多单和$SNDK空单，两笔仓位都处于浮亏状态。周末行情惯来清淡，价格缩在窄幅区间内反复徘徊，既没有给出任何惊喜，也没有制造更多伤疤。这种不上不下的等待，像极了一场无声的拉锯：多空双方都在休息，命运的答案只能留给下一周的市场。 真正值得玩味的，是他反复在同一个币种上跌倒的经历。据他自述，此前两次挑战均未能走到最后，原因如出一辙——都是因$SNDK遭遇爆仓而提前出局。连续三次在同一个标的上碰壁，这已经超出了技术分析的范畴，更像是仓位管理与交易纪律出现了系统性问题。做空$NDK未必是错误的方向判断，但每一次都因同一枚代币被扫出场外，说明止损执行与仓位比例之间始终没有找到合理的平衡。杠杆交易的世界里，方向看对了但仓位扛不到行情兑现的那一刻，与看错$SPCX has been frustrating traders because it simply refuses to follow the usual market rhythm. 📊
It can ignore bullish momentum, then suddenly lead the downside when sentiment turns weak.
Ahead of the US open, SPCX is again showing the same pattern seen several times last week: a small pre-market bounce followed by sharp selling after the bell.
With 7% of unlocked shares entering the market on the 20th, volatility could increase.
#BTCVolumeDriesUp #SPCXOwnershipRevealed #OKXOutcomeLeagueS2 $Tencent Music (TME)$ The focus of this Q2 financial report is that growth is increasingly driven by music-related services, rather than the social entertainment business of the past. Total revenue growth is slow, but memberships, offline performances, artist merchandise, and long-form audio are taking the lead; Meanwhile, social entertainment revenue continued to decline, and the merger of Ximalaya pushed the company into a stage of integrating music and audio. Let's look at the core data: Tencent Music's Q2 revenue was 8.933 billion yuan, up 5.8% year-on-year; Operating profit was 3.035 billion yuan, up 1.9% year-on-year. IFRS net profit attributable to shareholders was 2.471 billion yuan, up 2.6% year-on-year; Non-IFRS net profit attributable to shareholders was 2.686 billion yuan, up 4.4% year-on-year; Adjusted EBITDA was 3.254 billion yuan, up 5.2% year-on-year. This is a financial report showing growth in both revenue and profit, but the profit growth rate has not significantly diverged, indicating that new business expansion and content investment are still consuming some operating leverage. Music-related services have become the main growth driver. Music-related services generated revenue of 7.605 billion yuan, up 11.0% year-on-year, accounting for about 85% of total revenue. Of this, membership service revenue was 4.792 billion yuan, up 8.1% year-on-year; Marketing and consumer services revenue was 2.813 billion yuan, up 16.2% year-on-year. Starting from Q1 2026, the company will rename its original "online music services" to "music-related services" and include long-form audio under this scopeAI推理爆发带来的存储缺口不是短期周期炒作，属于结构性长期紧缺，原厂扩产周期2‑4年，头部厂商主动把产能倾斜到高毛利HBM，挤压NAND闪存产能，行业机构预判供需缺口至少延续到2027年下半年。云厂商提前签署数年长期供货协议锁产能，闪迪已经通过长协锁定近千亿订单，直接把传统周期生意转成稳定营收模式，这是美股上涨底层逻辑。同时HBF高带宽闪存叙事打开新想象空间，填补HBM容量不足的短板，专门匹配大模型推理场景，进一步推高市场预期 。 这套产业叙事顺着美股映射赛道传导到币圈，$SNDK代币成为普通用户参与存储行情最直接的渠道。大量无法直接开通美股账户的资金涌入，它成为成交第一的美股映射代币，日线走出连阳。要分清，代币行情分成两段：美股正股基本面驱动的趋势，和币圈游资独立拉盘的情绪行情，美股休市时段经常走出脱离正股的独立脉冲行情。 风险同样不能忽视。产业长期缺货不等于价格只会一直涨，短期涨幅已经充分透支一部分利好，RSI长期处在超买区间。币场内杠杆资金博弈烈度极高，24小时清算金额经常破千万美元。一旦利好阶段性兑现、美股正股出现回调，代币的回调幅度往往会大于美股正股。 对于交易而Starlink Crypto Macro Outlook for This Week August 17 to August 23
Over the past two weeks, BTC and ETH have been trading sideways within a range. The reason the price has been stuck is that the market is waiting for several key macro data releases this week. Excluding the inconsequential data, the core events that can directly influence the market are concentrated in just two days this week.
First, Thursday, August 20, the most critical day this week.
On this day, the US initial jobless claims will be released, and the Federal Reserve meeting minutes will also be published. BTC has been indecisive for so long mainly because the market is waiting for the actual wording in the Fed minutes regarding the rate cut path.
If the minutes signal a hawkish tone, implying continued observation and no rush to cut rates, the US dollar will strengthen, which is bearish for the crypto market, and funds will likely be dumped downward.
If the minutes lean dovish, implying a rate cut in September is basically certain, risk assets will celebrate, and BTC will very likely break out of the current consolidation range upward.
Traders and investors should note that before the data release early Thursday morning, positions must have tightened stop losses. Do not heavily bet on direction before major macro events to avoid sudden black swan moves.
Second, Friday, August 21, the US services PMI preliminary reading will be released.
This is a key indicator to judge whether the US economy is heading for a "hard landing." If this PMI data is significantly below expectations, market concerns about an economic recession will intensify, and the crypto market will panic sell. If the data beats expectations, it will provide new momentum for an upward breakout.
Third, the ordinary data from Monday to Wednesday.
Including Monday's Chinese retail sales and industrial production, Tuesday's UK unemployment rate, Eurozone economic sentiment index, etc. These data mainly affect domestic A-shares or European stock markets and have very limited direct impact on BTC and ETH. During these three days, BTC will most likely continue its recent range-bound consolidation without large-scale one-sided breakouts.
Trading execution guidance for this week:
This week is not one to make money relying on technical golden or death crosses but one to focus on "risk control" and "response."
In the first three days of the week, watch the resistance zone at 63500 to 64000 and the support zone from 62500 to 62200; do not act until these boundaries are reached.
Thursday's Fed minutes release is an absolute turning point. If the data release leads to a volume breakout above 64000, then follow the trend and wait for a pullback to go long. If the data release still breaks below 62500, a bearish trend will be established.
Remember, in such an intense macro week, the highest probability strategy is not guessing direction early in the week but following the right side after Thursday's macro release. Take action when given a position; if not, stay out and wait for Thursday, preserving capital to deploy when certainty is higher. $BTC $ETH $SOL #BTC成交萎缩，ETF买盘能否回暖 #SPCX持股结构曝光，哈佛13F重仓 BTC is stuck at 63,000. Today is not a reversal, but a "hand-off continuation" $BTC
This afternoon, BTC softened again at the 63.5k threshold: 24h volume up over 45%, price up less than 1%. This candlestick translates to one thing — some are selling above 63k, some are buying below 63k, but no one is willing to lead the charge.
Three new signals today:
Spot ETF: On 8/14, a net outflow of 57.63 million occurred again, marking three consecutive days of withdrawals. IBIT had a single-day redemption of 55.51 million; last week, the net inflow of 865 million flipped to a net outflow of 390 million, showing clear institutional pullback.
On-chain: In the past 24h, centralized exchanges had a net outflow of 950 coins, with long-term whales moving coins to cold wallets; however, Jump Crypto transferred 1,560 coins to Binance this week and still holds 1,410 coins on standby, indicating quant funds have not fully exited.
Macro: DXY at 99.66, 10Y yield at 4.68%. Before the 8/19 minutes, the Nasdaq is also diverging, with risk assets waiting to see if the tone will be "dovish or hawkish."
So today's key theme is not a "bull comeback," but waiting for direction within the compressed range of 62.5k–64.5k. Only a volume-backed hold above 63.5k → 64.5k will have potential; breaking below 62.5k means testing the lower channel at 61.5k again. $BTC The market had been stuck on that bearish candlestick for a long time. I stared at the $SNDK's intraday and thought to myself: it seems it doesn't want to resist anymore. Have you noticed that in this round of rebound, the ones truly picked up by funds are never the ones that have fallen the worst? $SNDK has dropped over 99% from its all-time high, and this figure on the screen almost feels like a silent verdict. Every time it seemed like a stabilizing position, new unlocking selling pressure gently pushed it back. Sell orders surged like a tide, wave after wave with no sign of stopping. On the other hand, names like $BICO, $BEAT, $ALLO, $KAITO, $APR, and others have pulled off a decent rebound thanks to the inflow of new liquidity. One market, two different temperatures. This gap is actually more worth pondering than the drop itself. - Internal sectors are being reranked by "whether anyone is willing to take over" rather than by "how much has fallen." - $SNDK What is missing is not the story, but the real traces of accumulation at the spot level. Without this signal, any rebound feels more like a technical breath. - Among similar assets, funds clearly prefer those with cleaner liquidity structures and less unlocking pressure, which is a very pragmatic risk appetite screening. What the market is truly trading is not "whether it will rise," but "how much unreleased supply is still waiting." $SNDK's dilemma lies not in the narrative, but in the structure. There is no clear bottom accumulation, nor signs of volume accumulation—that's what is called#SPCX持股结构曝光, Harvard's 13F heavy position: Why does the bragging king Elon Musk's SpaceX earn 2 trillion? SpaceX is worth $2 trillion—what was the first reaction? Foam. Empty it. Why is a rocket-building company worth two trillion dollars? Rocket Lab and Blue Origin are also making rockets, so why can SpaceX pull so far ahead of them? If you only think of SpaceX as an aerospace company, this valuation is indeed hard to explain, but the problem is, SpaceX can no longer be seen that way. What is truly noteworthy is that it has merged with xAI. AI model companies are becoming heavy-asset companies. In the past, internet companies were essentially light-asset. Pinduoduo is the most typical example: its core assets are people, software, and users. Offices can be rented, servers can be rented, and there are almost no heavy assets. But AI is different. If you want to make your model stronger, you'll need more and more GPUs; Behind GPUs are data centers, power, networks, and massive capital. Therefore, future AI companies must be heavy-asset enterprises combining "software + data centers + power." Kimi's previous suspension of new user subscriptions due to insufficient computing power is a very direct example. Computing power is no longer just a cost—it's starting to become the capacity of AI companies. So here's the question: Who can get computing power the fastest? This is where SpaceX's advantage emerges. xAI's Colossus data center, from the start of construction to...UBS's exposure to BlackRock's Bitcoin ETF is undergoing a directional shift from "holding" to "betting." According to the 13F filing, UBS made major adjustments to its IBIT portfolio structure in Q2 2026, with the following changes: Overview of portfolio changes: Call options: surged from 80,000 to 1,950,000, a more than 23-fold increase; Direct holdings: increased by 12% to 407,890 shares, valued at about $13.6 million; Put options: reduced from about 303,300 to 143,300, a decrease of about 53%. Signal of position structure The changes in UBS's IBIT holdings send a clear signal from two dimensions: a surge in call options—from defensive to offensive. From 80,000 to 1.95 million contracts, a 23-fold increase shows that UBS is no longer content with passive Bitcoin exposure, but is actively increasing directional bullish bets. Call options allow holders to buy IBIT at a predetermined price in the future—if Bitcoin rises, the value of these options will multiply. Put Option Halving: Market Concerns Fade Put Options Cutting more than half means UBS is reducing its hedging against Bitcoin's downside risk, market concerns are fading, and positions are becoming more optimistic. Direct holdings slightly increased holdings: spot positions remained stable Direct holdings of IBIT shares increased by 12% to 407,890 shares. Although not as explosive as call options, it maintained a steady pace of accumulation. Final thoughts: From 80,000 call options to 1.95 million contracts, from 300,000 put options to 140,000 contracts—SwitzerlandBTC is currently stagnant, hovering around 63000 for almost two weeks, with trading volume shrunk to an unrecognizable level, and the fear and greed index at 34, no one is willing to bet.
Last week, ETFs finally had a good run with a combined net inflow of $1.1 billion for BTC+ETH, the strongest week since April. BlackRock's IBIT alone contributed $690 million. However, this week turned sour, bleeding four out of five days, with barely $5 million inflow on Tuesday, and a weekly net outflow of about $390 million. Strategy funds have been selling for four consecutive weeks, turning from the strongest buyers into cash machines.
Interestingly, UBS increased IBIT call options from 80,000 to 1.95 million in Q2, a 24-fold surge, while their direct holdings only increased by 12%. Headlines claiming "tripled to 90 million" mix spot and call options together. On one side, old money is exiting; on the other, traditional finance is quietly betting.
More divided are stablecoins: total market cap shrank from 321 billion in May to 305 billion, a 5% drop, the third largest historical drawdown. Purchasing power is receding, the pool is drying up, so how can the fish jump?
So, can ETF buying rebound? In the short term, watch two signals: first, the August 19 FOMC minutes—whether the Fed stays dovish will directly decide if risk assets can catch a breather; second, whether ETFs can resume continuous net inflows. Last week BTC+ETH combined inflow was $1.1 billion but BTC didn’t rise much, indicating selling pressure remains. However, if inflows continue for several weeks, the bottom will be solidified.
Entering during a low-volume bottoming phase is just torture.
Purely for discussion, not investment advice #SPCX持股结构曝光, Harvard 13F heavy positioning. Recently, the latest SPCX 13F holding data was exposed, and many people saw a bunch of top institutions heavily holding positions and immediately believed the positive news was realizing.
But after seeing the list of holdings, my first impression wasn't reassurance, but rather that the shares were too crowded.
Among Harvard's public holdings, SPCX accounts for 51.8% of the disclosed portfolio, Nvidia holds over 100 million shares, and Google, Fidelity, and BlackRock are all present.
Everyone must distinguish that most of these chips were invested in the primary market years ago, not bought in the secondary market recently. Institutional costs and holding cycles are completely different from retail investors, so don't blindly follow the crowd.
By the way, compare two popular stocks: SNDK's rise is driven by AI storage demand, with tangible performance and orders; SPCX relies more on the scarcity of circulating listings, institutional aura, and future expectations.
One is performance-driven, the other is chip-driven; their fundamental logic is completely different.
Next, the key is not to wait until new institutions enter the market, but to closely monitor the unlocking cycle.
After restricted shares are gradually unlocked, whether original shareholders sell or not, and whether the market can withstand the selling pressure, will be the key factors determining the market's direction.
Remember this: highly concentrated chips are a double-edged sword. Once funds loosen, volatility can far exceed expectations.#BTC trading volume shrinks, can ETF buying pick up again?
$BTC dormant supply hits a new high, is scarcity really back?
Recent on-chain data shows a large amount of BTC has not moved for a long time. The chart mentions that potentially "lost" or long-term dormant BTC is about 3.56 million coins, accounting for approximately 17.7% of circulating supply.
This cannot be simply understood as these BTC being permanently lost, because on-chain data only shows "no movement for a long time"; it cannot confirm whether the private keys are lost or the holders are intentionally holding long-term without selling.
But this data is still very important.
Bitcoin's total supply is only 21 million coins. If we further subtract long-term dormant, permanently lost, and institutionally held BTC, then the BTC truly willing to be traded in the market is actually less than the apparent supply.
This means that as long as new demand re-enters, such as continuous net inflows from ETFs or companies continuing to allocate BTC, while old coins holders are unwilling to sell, the supply-demand relationship will tighten, and price volatility may be amplified.
So what really needs to be watched is not just "how much BTC is dormant," but:
Whether dormant supply increases, ETF funds flow back, and exchange BTC balances decline can all happen simultaneously.
The true scarcity of BTC is not just limited total supply, but that more and more coins are leaving the circulating market.The shorts have revealed their trump cards: 63,971 and 65,100, two numbers that decide life or death.
This morning, some couldn't sleep, while others woke up laughing.
At dawn, two major BTC short whales, just 3 seconds apart, simultaneously rolled their positions and increased their stakes.
Together, they added 585.3 BTC, about $36.83 million, at an average price of $62,935.
This is no coincidence.
It's the same group, using the same script, betting on the same direction.
Come, I'll reveal their trump cards one by one.
🔴 Short cost zone: ~ $64,030
The two whales shorted a total of 2,675 BTC, with positions valued at $169 million.
The address starting with 0x8c96 shorted 1,600 BTC at 22x leverage, with an average entry price of $64,051 and liquidation price at $65,128.
The address starting with 0x431f shorted 1,075 BTC at 22x leverage, with an average entry price of $64,030 and liquidation price at $65,103.
Their costs are almost identical, liquidation prices nearly the same, and the time difference in adding positions is only 3 seconds.
This is not two independent decisions. It's one operator managing multiple accounts.
Currently, their combined unrealized profit is about $2.62 million.
🟡 Stop-loss trigger zone: $63,971
The "reduce only" stop-loss market orders for both positions are uniformly set to trigger at $63,971.
They cover a total of 1,003.1 BTC, corresponding to $64.17 million at the trigger price, accounting for 37.5% of their total positions.
If the price rebounds here, $64.17 million in buy orders will flood in instantly—this is the shorts insuring themselves.
🔴 Short liquidation zone: ~ $65,100
If the price breaks above $65,100, the $169 million short positions will face forced liquidation.
🟢 Short target zone: $58,123 - $58,423
Take-profit trigger prices are set at $58,123 and $58,423 respectively.
They not only want to make money, they want to smash the price below 60,000.
The current game boils down to one question—
Do the bulls have the strength to push the price past 65,100? Do the shorts have the power to crash it down to 58,000?
Don't rush, it's not over yet.
The whole network data is even scarier: if BTC breaks above $65,917, the cumulative short liquidation intensity on major CEXs will reach $315 million. If BTC falls below $60,392, the cumulative long liquidation intensity on major CEXs will also reach $315 million.
Both sides have a knife hanging over their heads. Whoever drops first dies.
The Fear & Greed Index today is 30, in a "fear" state, down 5 points from yesterday. Market sentiment is low but not extreme.
Fear often signals smart money positioning.
But note—over the past 24 hours, the whole network liquidations totaled $79.75 million, with short liquidations accounting for $2.46 million, a significantly higher proportion.
Shorts are making money but are also being liquidated.
Operational suggestions (not investment advice, purely tactical map):
First, closely watch volume changes around $63,971.
If the price touches here but doesn't rebound with volume—it means stop-loss orders have been absorbed, and shorts may continue to add and push down.
Second, if the price breaks above $63,400 with volume and holds, the shorts' defense line starts to weaken.
Third, $65,100 is the shorts' lifeline. Once volume breaks through, the $169 million short positions will cascade liquidate, and no one knows how far the short squeeze will push the price.
Fourth, if the price heads toward 58,000—don't bottom-fish, wait for the take-profit orders to release first.
The shorts have shown you their trump cards.
How to play it, you decide.
This is not investment advice. Just a battlefield map.
$BTC $ETH Short sellers are still increasing their positions, ETFs are running, BTC is sideways at 63,000, who will break first?
The second largest BTC short seller added another 450 BTC this morning in the 62,858 to 63,435 range, increasing their holdings from 1,250 to 1,700 BTC, with a total short position value of about $107 million and an average cost of $64,016. The top short seller is even worse off, having closed 30 positions since August 5th all at a loss, with fees and losses totaling about $9 million, still holding on with 2,000 BTC short positions worth $127 million. Together, the two major short sellers are betting about $234 million.
Short sellers lost $9 million but are still adding, indicating they believe the 63,000 level won't hold.
On the other side, last week Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a net outflow of $390 million, the largest weekly outflow since the end of June. Fidelity's FBTC saw $153 million outflow, Grayscale's GBTC $88.3 million, and BlackRock's IBIT $78.96 million. ETFs are running.
Glassnode's analysis today is straightforward: funds are accelerating into stocks and AI, Bitcoin is clearly being ignored, and the on-chain buy support wall has been fading since June.
Shorts are increasing, ETFs are running, funds are withdrawing. The 63,000 level has been sideways for a month. Whoever breaks first, the direction will follow them.
$BTC $ETH 80% of S&P companies have exceeded earnings expectations, so why hasn't a bull market arrived?
Now nearly 90% of U.S. stocks have reported earnings, with the vast majority of profits and revenues far surpassing expectations. Logically, the market should surge, but major institutions remain very cautious.
This is because everyone anticipated good earnings reports and rushed to buy shares in advance, so the positive news has already been priced in.
The U.S. stock market still faces two old, recurring issues. First, U.S. Treasury yields remain too high, severely limiting the stock market's upside. Second, the AI theme has been hyped for so long that even if companies aren’t growing profits fast enough, investors will turn hostile and sell off.
The phase of boosting stock prices by storytelling is over; from now on, real profitability in cold hard cash is what counts.
When buying stocks, don’t just focus on hot concepts; look for companies that can truly turn AI technology into profits and cash flow.
As long as earnings don’t lag, the U.S. stock market can still rise. But if profits can’t keep up, the current high valuations will become a huge minefield.
#标普盈利超预期，华尔街为何仍谨慎？ BTC holding above $63,500 while the market focuses on drying volume and record dormant supply is not a clean breakout signal. I read it as constrained liquidity meeting reluctant sellers, which can support price but leaves momentum fragile.
ETH is modestly outperforming BTC and SOL over 24 hours, yet the broader macro backdrop remains unsettled as weak consumption and a divided Fed compete with the AI earnings narrative. My bias is cautious: preserve exposure, but do not mistake low-volatility resilience for confirmed risk appetite.
Just my read, not advice.$Berkshire Hathaway (BRK. A)$ The most noteworthy aspect of this latest Q2 13F report isn't how many new stocks Berkshire suddenly switched to, but rather the portfolio continuing to concentrate on a few high-conviction assets. Alphabet and Delta Air Lines saw significant increases, while financials, some consumer sectors, and edge positions continued to shrink. Behind these moves was a combination of "adding core, reducing diversification." Let's first look at the overall portfolio. As of June 30, 2026, Berkshire's disclosed long US stock portfolio had a market value of about $299.3 billion, up about 14% from the previous quarter, with 29 holdings. It should be noted that this market cap change is also affected by fluctuations in the stock price of the position, so it should not be simply understood as net buying scale. Apple, American Express, Coca-Cola, Alphabet, and Bank of America remain the most important securities in the portfolio, with the top five single securities together accounting for nearly 70%, maintaining high concentration. Alphabet has become the most prominent buying trend this quarter. Berkshire increased its Alphabet Class A shares by 45% to 78.79 million shares and by 658% to 27.19 million shares in Alphabet Class C. The combined market capitalization of these two stocks is approximately $37.8 billion, accounting for about 12.6% of the portfolio. This is not a new symbolic position, but a substantial increase in existing holdings. However, 13F only disclosed its ending positions and did not explain the buying logic, so this move cannot be simply interpreted as a direct statement on a particular AI theme.July on Wall Street taught a harsh lesson to the AI frenzy that had lasted nearly two years. When news broke that Jane Street had lost $15 billion in a single month, insiders' first reaction was not shock, but relief that "the boot finally dropped." After all, no sector can maintain a steep upward slope forever, especially when valuations have been pushed up by capital to near distortion. This Wall Street giant, known for its quantitative trading and market making, has unusually tasted a monthly loss for the first time in a decade, and the trigger behind it is those once-glorious star stocks in the AI chain. The July data was more straightforward than expected. Micron, SanDisk, and a series of AI-related stocks saw pullbacks of 28% to 46%. This was not a minor fluctuation, but a typical crowded trading chain of stampedes. Funds in the market that rely on high leverage and hold extreme confidence in so-called "situational awareness" logic appear exceptionally fragile in the face of price fluctuations. When asset prices fall rapidly, leverage is no longer a tool to amplify gains but instead becomes a catalyst for accelerating the crash. Forced liquidation, margin calls, liquidity exhaustion—textbook terms—played out in real time this July. To understand this loss, you need to look at it from two perspectives. The first dimension is fundamentals: Jane Street's net trading revenue over the past year still exceeded $40 billion, indicating that its business foundation has not been shaken by this loss, and the platform remains strongBitcoin is closely following the upper band of the 1-hour Bollinger Bands, very likely to develop a one-sided trend
Currently, it's getting close to the 637, 640 levels I mentioned, with a volume spike that could cause a sharp move…On-chain aggressively devouring 10% of Korean stock liquidity: SK Hynix hits $2.3 billion in 7 days, is on-chain 24/7 trading going crazy?
According to the latest monitoring by TradingBeats, the synthetic assets and traditional asset on-chain trading platform Trade xyz saw a total transaction volume of $18.68 billion in the past 7 days. Although this only accounts for 0.258% penetration compared to the massive overall US stock market, in some specific vertical targets, on-chain liquidity has already begun to substantially encroach upon the traditional financial strongholds.
The most striking case is SK Hynix (SKHX).
In the past 7 days, this asset recorded a full $2.36 billion in on-chain trading volume. How impressive is this number? It directly equals 10.5% of SK Hynix’s total $22.55 billion trading volume on the Korean domestic main board during the same period, a penetration rate 40 times higher than the platform average. This single contract alone accounts for over 10% of the platform’s total trading volume.
Following closely is the DRAM memory chip index, with $837 million in on-chain volume and a penetration rate as high as 5.93%. Brent crude oil also reached a penetration rate of 1.56%.
Why does on-chain capital prefer to aggressively trade Korean semiconductor and DRAM memory indexes instead of traditional forex or regular US stocks?
The answer lies in the "time zone barriers and access thresholds" of cross-border finance.
For the vast majority of crypto-native capital and non-Korean local investors worldwide, directly opening a Korean securities account and exchanging Korean won to speculate on SK Hynix and Samsung’s HBM cycles involves extremely complicated compliance reviews and foreign exchange controls, plus the physical limitations of Asian trading time zones.
On-chain, as long as you hold stablecoins, you can leverage the world’s hottest AI chip leaders anytime, 24/7, anywhere.
Another crucial factor is the pricing vacuum during traditional financial market closures.
Last Friday, Trade xyz’s single-day volume jumped nearly 30% to $3.41 billion, and over the past two weekends, it accumulated $1.15 billion in trading volume. When geopolitical situations suddenly change over the weekend or major AI industry news breaks, traditional exchanges close their doors, making on-chain 24/7 perpetual contracts the only outlet for global capital to hedge risks and price sentiment in real time.
In contrast, traditional forex pairs like USD/JPY have a meager on-chain penetration rate of only 0.033% due to the extremely abundant liquidity and near round-the-clock operation of traditional forex markets.
This clearly shows that on-chain trading’s erosion of traditional assets is not a blind expansion but a precise targeting of structural pain points in assets with "high traditional channel barriers, significant cross-border frictions, and volatile non-trading hours."
As more high-quality non-US stocks and major industry indexes move on-chain, the high walls built by opening hours and broker licenses in traditional finance are silently being dismantled by 24/7 uninterrupted on-chain liquidity.
Trading SK Hynix, oil, or chip indexes on-chain with stablecoins versus trading US and Hong Kong stocks through traditional brokers — which experience do you think better fits the future trading model? Do you usually hedge macro risks on weekends using on-chain tools?
---
The above content represents personal views only and does not constitute any investment advice. DYOR, NFA.
#韩股十日反弹逾22%，芯片股领涨 Goldman Sachs changes stance, BTC volume unchanged
Goldman Sachs released a signal today: the market's pricing of interest rate hikes may be off.
Rate hike in September? Very unlikely. Retail data is weak, employment is weak, inflation shows no improvement. Goldman Sachs believes the market's timing for rate hikes is too early, and future expectations will continue to shift later, even not ruling out an early arrival of easing.
For $BTC and $ETH:
In the short term, the macro environment is indeed warming, theoretically favorable for risk assets. But the problem is, last week ETFs still had net outflows, buying momentum didn't keep up, so prices lack upward momentum. BTC still faces resistance at 63800-64500; before a volume breakout, news can at most provide a floor, but can't yet drive a rally.
In the medium term, if subsequent data continues to weaken, expectations for rate cuts will gradually strengthen. A weaker dollar plus liquidity release is potential support for both BTC and ETH. However, ETH needs to wait for BTC to stabilize first; an independent rally is not to be expected for now.
The macro environment is sending warm signals, but if BTC can't hold 63700, it's all in vain. First watch how the 62800-63700 range plays out; don't rush to surge just because of one piece of news.
#BTC成交萎缩，ETF买盘能否回暖 From August 17 to 21, the U.S. stock market faces several key events. The screenshot lists 9 time points: New York Fed manufacturing, import prices, EIA crude oil inventory, Federal Reserve FOMC meeting minutes, initial jobless claims, Philadelphia Fed manufacturing, Japan core CPI, S&P Global manufacturing and services PMI. If the two PMIs are combined into "PMI preliminary values," there are 8 major data events; adding Nvidia's CPO switch mass production as an industry milestone makes nine major events. I've arranged them in a table by Beijing time and will highlight a few key points—no predictions on price movements, just what the market is watching when each data point is released. 🚨“White-Haired Stock God” Serenity: Nvidia may have already written the script for the next phase of AI, but the market always likes to wait for the answers to be announced before believing it.
This is actually quite interesting.
Looking back to 2025, Nvidia locked in EML and laser capacity well in advance. At that time, many people were still mocking: Is photonics just another hype? But a year later, related optical communication companies took off directly—Lumentum rose 678%, Applied Optoelectronics rose over 475%, Coherent rose over 260%, and AXT surged more than 3800%. 🔥
Now the market might be repeating the same script.
In 2026, Nvidia again started to lay out capacity for continuous wave (CW) lasers and EML in advance, while continuously emphasizing 800V power architecture, CPO co-packaged optics, and Physical AI.
But the market’s current attitude is still the same old story: wait and see, don’t hype it yet.
CW lasers? Just hype.
800V? Not visible in the short term.
CPO? Too early.
Humanoid robots? Even further from truly making money.
But the problem is, Nvidia didn’t wait for the market to believe before taking action.
It’s more like a chef who “announces the next dish in advance”: telling you what you’re going to eat next, then buying all the ingredients ahead of time. The market didn’t believe it then, but when the dish was finally served, they realized—damn, Jensen Huang had it all prepared long ago. 😂
This actually offers some inspiration for the crypto market as well.$SAMSUNG Let's talk about Samsung. The previous post was blocked due to too few words. Among the top storage companies, including Micron, SanDisk, Hynix, TSMC, Intel, and Nvidia, if you look closely at the numbers, Samsung's price-to-sales ratio and price-to-earnings ratio are overall the lowest. Although Samsung has many businesses beyond storage, according to the barbell strategy in the anti-fragility principle, Samsung is actually both offensively capable and defensively secure, making it the storage stock with the best overall cost-performance ratio. Fortunately, the stock price has already reflected this. The coming period should show a clear upward trend, with new highs just around the corner. Many people have probably noticed that BTC trading volume has been shrinking recently. BTC is grinding back and forth at a critical level, but the market clearly lacks active buying; both bulls and bears seem a bit exhausted.
Many panic as soon as they see shrinking volume, wondering if a market reversal or crash is coming. My view is not that pessimistic, but definitely not optimistic either.
The core issue now is stuck on the spot ETF buying. Since the beginning of this year, ETF funds have become the most important pricing anchor for BTC. When buying picks up, the market immediately stabilizes; once ETFs have consecutive net outflows or zero inflows, the market quickly enters a stagnant state with minor fluctuations.
The problem is, Wall Street institutional funds are not charity. Without clear macro expectations and genuine substantial easing of dollar liquidity, they won’t blindly chase highs. Everyone is waiting now—for September’s policy rollout, for more macro data to verify whether the economy is landing softly or hard.
In my opinion, before ETF buying truly turns continuously positive again and daily net inflows expand, it’s hard to enlarge trading volume relying solely on retail investors and existing funds. Low-volume oscillation will continue for a while.
For ordinary people like us, this kind of market is the most frustrating. It neither rises strongly nor falls deeply.
So when volume shrinks, don’t guess the direction, and don’t blindly increase leverage to bet on a breakout. BTC has strong support below, and above there are ETF unwind positions and trapped positions pressing down. Range-bound oscillation is the main theme; we need patience to wait slowly $BTC $ETH #BTC成交萎缩，ETF买盘能否回暖 #BTCVolumeDriesUp
📊 #ETHVolumeShift｜ETH trading volume begins to "derivative-ize" 🔷⚡
The most notable recent change in ETH is concentrated in its trading structure. Current data from CoinGlass shows that ETH spot trading volume in the past 24 hours is about $921 million, while futures trading volume reaches approximately $26.49 billion, nearly 29 times the spot volume; meanwhile, ETH futures open interest remains around $26.08 billion, with 24-hour derivative liquidation amounting to about $95.12 million. Capital remains active, with trading activity mainly focused on perpetual contracts and futures markets. (coinglass)
🔥 This data set forms a very important combination with the price trend. ETH is currently still trading around the $1880–$1900 range, with Coinbase real-time price about $1881, and price volatility relatively limited. (Coinbase) Futures turnover exceeds $26 billion daily, while spot is only about $900 million, indicating that a large amount of trading comes from leveraged position adjustments, short-term hedging, and repeated long-short exchanges. The price has not yet followed the futures trading volume to break through at the same level, so the current volume leans more toward high turnover, high leverage, and low trend confirmation.
💰 ETF funds provide another observation clue. Recently, ETH spot ETFs have shown relatively stronger fund performance compared to BTC, with ETH continuously receiving net inflows on some trading days, while BTC fund flows fluctuate. This has provided some spot support for ETH price. What really needs to be observed now is whether ETF inflows can continue to expand and gradually drive spot exchange volume to rise synchronously. Once spot volume starts to increase, the effectiveness of ETH breaking through $1900 will be significantly enhanced.
⚡ The derivatives side has already accumulated large positions. CoinGlass statistics show ETH OI exceeds $26 billion, and real-time Funding remains in positive territory, indicating leveraged longs are still willing to pay funding costs. (coinglass) If ETH continues to consolidate sideways, funding rates and high OI will gradually increase holding costs; if the price quickly breaks below $1850, high-leverage longs may concentrate on reducing positions, causing intraday volume and liquidation amounts to rapidly expand.
📈 The ideal upcoming volume-price structure for ETH is rising spot volume + continuous ETF inflows + moderate OI growth + price breaking above $1900. If the structure of "extremely high futures volume, relatively low spot volume" continues, short-term volatility will easily be dominated by leveraged funds. Currently, ETH's capital heat is clearly higher than its price performance; the next volume breakout may determine the final direction in which these leveraged positions are released. 🔷🔥
$BTC $ETH
SanDisk's rise is even more meteoric; I really like the community's relentless shorting spirit, as if only short positions can demonstrate one's understanding.
Hundreds of thousands or tens of millions just gone down the drain...
After speculating too much on altcoins, your brain will go bad.
Looking down on the returns of those buying the main stock? Just wait for large losses from leverage. XPL Technical Update: Breakout Setup on Watch! $XPL is currently forming a tight consolidation base around $0.076, following a prolonged downtrend. While price action remains range-bound, a high-probability Breakout & Retest setup is developing. 📈 Execution plan for XPL on the 4H chart Wait for a solid 4H candle close above $0.0810 accompanied by a noticeable surge in trading volume to confirm buyer strength. • Entry Zone: Retest of $0.0790 – $0.0800 after the breakout confirmation. • Stop Loss$BTC
Everyone should have noticed that recently Bitcoin has not experienced a sharp drop, but the overall market remains weak, with weak rebounds and poor liquidity.
I believe the core issue is not a single negative factor, but the combination of insufficient buying power + decreased risk appetite among funds + multiple failed technical breakouts.
1. Insufficient buying power: ETF funds have not formed a sustained upward driving force, and the market lacks new liquidity. There is still capital support during declines, but no chasing funds during rises, so every small rally is met with selling pressure.
2. Cautious macro environment: Expectations for Federal Reserve rate cuts have repeatedly cooled, related US legislation keeps being delayed, and no substantial positive news has materialized. Some funds choose to wait and watch, unwilling to chase prices higher.
3. Weak technicals: Multiple rebound attempts to break through have all failed, directly undermining bullish confidence and leading to a weak, oscillating pattern.
In summary: currently, existing funds are battling back and forth with no new capital entering. The biggest problem is not that someone is dumping, but that the buying power is insufficient, which makes the market feel particularly weak and frustrating.
⚠️ Risk reminder: This is only a market opinion review and does not constitute any investment or trading advice